I know SF's biggest rivals used to be the LA Rams, and later the Cowboys,but it seems like anywhere you read, SF Fans seem to truly hate Seattle Fans and the Seahawks. They don't really seem to care about the Rams or Cards (and this has been consistent IMO for awhile and not just as we have emerged this season as the top threat to their division supremecy). So are we locked and loaded as their main rival? Is it just Carroll/Harbaugh? Did they just come to hate us during the mid 2000's when we owned the NFCW? Will they revert back when the Rams become more competitive (especially if they eventually end up back in LA)?

On a related, but not really note, It seems like we have never had an exclusive true rival. I think Arizona is in the same boat, and if maybe the Holmgren/Hass heydays could have overlapped more with Warner's best years in AZ we could have established this.

Alot of the older SF fans will hate the Rams more than anyone else, that's a Rivalry that's been going on for decades

The newer fans will most likely hate Seattle given not just the similar styles of the teams, but the polar opposites of the head coaches and lets be real here; we're 2 dogs fighting for the same bone and from the looks on how both of us are building our teams, will continue to do so for the foreseeable future

I think one thing has to happen before it becomes Cowboys/49ers like in the 90's... both teams need to win Super Bowls. I will tell you things are certainly heating up though - I travel back/forth to the Bay Area all the time and nobody talks about the Rams or the Cardinals there at all. Seattle is the hated team. SF is a little unusual too because they have so many Raiders fans in the area - plus so many foreigners and adopt-a-team due to relocation people there. Overall though, I'd say for us it's definitely SF, for them we're probably trending as their top rivalry.

Sgt. Largent wrote:IMO it's not a rivalry until we beat them as much as they beat us.........and so far Carroll is 0-3 against Harbaugh.

But yeah definitely the potential to be a long term rivalry if both teams stay competitive.

And yet overall we're still ahead of them 13-12 all-time, and 11-9 since being in the same division. Of course there will be little streaks involved during an ongoing series.

True, but great rivalries are between great teams. Is Washington State vs. Oregon State a "great" rivalry cause they've played each other 75 times? Number of times played doesn't = rivalry.

Rivalries have to have history, and there's a history between Harbaugh and Carroll, "what's your deal man!" IMO no one cared about the 20 times we've played each other while we were both bad teams, or we were good but they weren't, and vice versa.

The Seahawks who couldn't win on the road went on the road and beat the 49ers late in 2003 to make the playoffs. There was the Terrell Owens Sharpie game. There is history here. It's a young history as you have to expect from teams that have only shared a division for a decade, but it does pre-date Harbaugh.

It would take a decade of both teams being consistent winners for the Seahawks to be considered San Fran's rivals. In the early 2000's many considered the Rams and Seahawks as the biggest rivals in the NFCW. The Rams and 9ers have history, as well as the old NFCW rivals Falcons and Saints when they were in this division.

The Seahawks are probably like the Titans as the old Houston Oilers. Maybe a rivalry can be quickly generated, but I think it takes time. Even when the Seahawks were in the AFCW, the Seahawks were not considered by division opponents as rivals. The Chiefs, Broncos and Raiders were each other's rival. Bolts and Seahawks were just little brothers that needed to sit in the corner and keep their mouth shut. Seahawks fans felt like the Raiders, Broncos and to a lesser degree, Chiefs as their rivals but I never felt that was reciprocated. Notice how I left out the Bolts?

We will see what the 9er fans think but I doubt we are nothing more than a new fad rival until both sides have major pelts on the wall against one another. The past decade has help set the seed of resentment but major stakes helps.

Last edited by drdiags on Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:45 am, edited 2 times in total.

Sgt. Largent wrote:IMO it's not a rivalry until we beat them as much as they beat us.........and so far Carroll is 0-3 against Harbaugh.

But yeah definitely the potential to be a long term rivalry if both teams stay competitive.

And yet overall we're still ahead of them 13-12 all-time, and 11-9 since being in the same division. Of course there will be little streaks involved during an ongoing series.

True, but great rivalries are between great teams. Is Washington State vs. Oregon State a "great" rivalry cause they've played each other 75 times? Number of times played doesn't = rivalry.

Rivalries have to have history, and there's a history between Harbaugh and Carroll, "what's your deal man!" IMO no one cared about the 20 times we've played each other while we were both bad teams, or we were good but they weren't, and vice versa.

Ummm...no. Rivalries develop due to playing eachother. Teams have rivalries....coaches don't.

T-Sizzle wrote:Ummm...no. Rivalries develop due to playing eachother. Teams have rivalries....coaches don't.

Tell that to Carroll and Harbaugh......or Rex Ryan and Bellicheat.

So by your definition every team is a rivalry cause we play every team in the NFL eventually. IMO true rivalries have certain traits;

- long history of not only playing each other, but equal success (no one thinks Florida State vs Duke in football is a rivalry, cause FSU has won 99% of the time)- mutual hatred from players, fans AND coaches- signature games and plays

The Hawks and 49'ers certainly have the potential to become a great rivalry, but we're not there yet.

LOL. Maybe in your mind. But definitely not in the mind of Mike Singletary. I recall a vindictive Mike Singletary investing an entire off season toward instilling in 49er players a hatred for the Seattle Seahawks prior to the opening game of what would thankfully be his final season on the west coast.

Not sure I agree JVille with the Singletary investment concept. Why would he care about the Seahawks? They hadn't done anything at the time for the past 2 seasons under Mora and a lame duck Holmgren. If anything he may have been pumping them up for an expected butt-whooping he intended to put on the Seahawks under a new coach in Pete Carroll. Remember, the 9ers considered the Seahawks as soft back then as described by MikeRob. If anything our style probably was a blight in Sing's mind, so I would say he felt disgust toward our style of football if anything. Not a rivalry.

The Dockett/9ers back and forth during and after the Cardinals Superbowl run was intense. I think you need to reconsider if your view matches what others felt during that time.

drdiags wrote:Not sure I agree JVille with the Singletary investment concept. Why would he care about the Seahawks. They hadn't done anything at the time for the past 2 seasons under Mora and a lame duck Holmgren. If anything he may have been pumping them up for an expected butt-whooping he intended to put on the Seahawks under a new coach in Pete Carroll.

The Dockett/9ers back and forth during and after the Cardinals Superbowl run was intense. I think you need to reconsider if your view matches what others felt during that time.

I'm wasn't addressing what was taking place on the field during the season. Nor was I addressing the perceptions of fans. IMO ... Arizona was the 49er's biggest rivalry.

I was taking a shot at Singletary's state of mind prior to the opening day of his final season in San Francisco.

As a 49er fan in my mid-30s, the thought of the Rams conjures ghosts of Eric Dickerson & Co. That rivalry was great but simmered down. There was a slight resurgence with their Greatest Show on Turf, but the Niners weren't as competitive enough to make the most of the matchup. Jeff Fisher is building something special there in St. Louis. The Cowboys will always make my blood boil; it's a classic Conference rivalry with rich, historical relevance. The showdowns we had in the 90s was the REAL Super Bowl - a true clash of the titans.

This budding rivalry with the hawks may turn out to be a good one, if both teams remain competitive. The Harbaugh/Carroll aspect adds another dimension to it, which is great. I'm looking forward to both teams having divisional slobberknockers for years to come.

When we came BACK to the NFC west the Rams were hot and we knocked them off and began our run. SF was a Holmgren historical thing and beating them was beating his previous team type rivalry, then the cheap hits on Hass turned it up a lot. Bad blood started to flow and intensify what was going on. The Harbaugh hiring and both of the teams now being relatively equal as far as talent and win loss records is just another level of turning up the volume and hitting the loud button as well.

To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!! Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. Member of the 38 club.

As a kid I always thought the Raiders were our #1 rival and the Broncos were a close 2nd. Now I'm seeing it is just that I hated those teams so badly. But I felt like the Hawks and Raiders and Broncos all had a good 3 way rivalry going in the mid-80's that just petered out thanks to Ken Behring. He ruined what was turning into a really great thing (sort of like Redskins, Giants, Cowboys, Eagles).

I hated the decision to move out of the AFC West and back to the NFC, but realize now that Paul Allen was wise in agreeing to it quickly and creating a clean slate and more regional of a rivalry. KC and Denver weren't as close geographically. It's sort of like the Rams now. It just doesn't make much sense unless they get back to LA. Otherwise I think they ought to seriously consider realigning again and moving the Rams to a different division and moving a team that comes to LA into the NFC West or moving the Chargers in and an LA team to replace them in the AFC West. I kind of feel like the Chargers would be a good addition to the division and the conference if massive re-aligning were to occur again. They would be a natural geographical rival with Arizona and then the Raiders would have a natural rivalry with whoever moves into LA because of the fact that the Raiders still feel they "own" the LA market.

Rivalries are by their nature existential and short lived. For as long as two teams are both good, the rivalry lives. But as soon as one of those teams fails to be competitive, the rivalry dies off and new rivalries are forged. The key here is that both Seattle and SF figure to be very good for a very long time. The rivalry is in it's infancy, and it won't last forever, but for the next 10 years or so it figures to be one of the best rivalries the NFL has ever seen.

Packers vs Bears will always be a rivalry, even when both or one is not doing well (see post Lombardi Packers). That is a true rivalry. Papa Halas vs Lambeau/Lombardi type rivalry. Sort of like the Yankees vs Red Sox. Lot of history is involved and nostalgia romanticizes the games.

The NFL-AFL merger took some old rivalries and diluted them. Cowboys vs Redskins because of their success with Gibbs and Landry has staying power. NY Giants as well but losing Baltimore Colts to the AFC nipped a nice rivalry from that region, only now to give us Steelers vs Ravens.

Makes the most sense regionally to me and has huge rivalry potential especially in the new AFC South. I've always thought KC and STL should be an instate play every year rivalry that could become huge.

They will never bust up the AFC west, it is comprised of the original AFC teams, Al Davis is gone but the owners of the teams are still unified in staying together, it's why we were the natural selection to move again.

To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!! Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. Member of the 38 club.